Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

9

The verse: πρὸς ὃ δύνασθε ἀναγινώσκοντες νοῆσαι τὴν σύνεσίν μου ἐν τῷ μυστηρίῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ. When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ.(ESV) [With reference] to which, reading, you are able to know...(my overly literal rendition) Indeed, ὃ is the object of the preposition. That’s a relative pronoun, here declined ...


6

Kennedy summarizes his view on p. 5, and OP's sense that the paseq is a rough equivalent to how we use [sic] strikes me as about right. Kennedy's view, however, doesn't seem like a plausible -- or at least certainly not a sufficient -- explanation of this masoretic notation. On the one hand, there are just too many instances in which no such "warning" is ...


5

The context (see verse 6) justifies translating the v' as "but." Furthermore, it clearly demonstrates that she is not actually black but simply very darkly tanned. Do not stare at me because I am swarthy [i.e. dark], For the sun has burned me. My mother’s sons were angry with me; They made me caretaker of the vineyards, But I have not taken care ...


5

Yes, the imperative is an accurate translation.1 The text in question: ἐγερθεὶς ἆρόν σου τὴν κλίνην καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου. (NA28) “Rise, pick up your bed and go home.” (ESV) The first two words I will label: ἐγερθεὶς: participle (aorist passive) ἆρόν: main verb (2nd person, aorist active imperative) This usage of the participle is ...


5

I will limit my comments to the question is the “inclusive” reading of οἱ δὲ grammatically impossible rather than merely improbable which is the majority view: Stephanie Black objects to Grayston's approach, observing that οἱ δὲ signals discontinuity and would be highly unlikely if there were continuity of subject with the previous sentence. (Stephanie ...


5

Partitive or Switched Subject is Nearly Certain as Correct K. Grayston makes an argument for the inclusive view,1 but is challenged by both K. L. McKay's brief reply,2 and P.W. van der Horst's more lengthy reply,3 both upholding a partitive view. Grayston argues the inclusive view largely upon two points. First, the inclusive is the case in the primary ...


5

There are two, possibly inter-related, issues here. One is the preposition expected with the root mlk in the hifil; the other is the relationship between the prepositions ʾel and ʿal. 1. MLK + ?? Typically the verb mlk takes the preposition ʿal, "rule over", and in the Hifil it appears so on at least six occasions (1 Sam. 12:1; 2 Ki. 8:20; 1 Chr. 28:4; 2 ...


4

Short Answer: We can be fairly certain this is just saying that before Jesus could go back up to heaven, He first had to go down to the earth, which is lower. The variants There are two major textual variants in this verse listed by the UBS4, and they shed some light on what is going on here. 1) A large number of later sources added "first" so that it ...


4

In my opinion no. The sentence remains the same in translation to the English. In regards to reading Koine Greek generally some folk might say that a certain word order departs from the standard and is therefore "emphatic", but in my opinion this can be very subjective and runs the danger of reading things into the text never meant by the author and I don't ...


4

The Greek text of 1 Thes. 4:3 according to the Textus Receptus (which the KJV is partly based on) states: τοῦτο γάρ ἐστιν θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ ἁγιασμὸς ὑμῶν ἀπέχεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ τῆς πορνείας One would expect the Greek word καὶ between θεοῦ and ὁ, in order for it to be translated into English as "even." However, this isn't always necessary. Clearly θέλημα ...


3

The Idea in Brief The Paseq serves various purposes in the Hebrew Bible. In the first chapter of Genesis, the purpose of the Paseq served as the logical dichotomy between the divine name and what followed. That is, the Paseq occurs in verse 5 and also in verse 10, but was not necessary on the basis of the Masoretic accent principles. Its function was to ...


3

The articular infinitive is fun, isn’t it? This may be the most common construction in the Koine Greek that is has no real English equivalent. I’m a little confused about the way the sentence was parsed by your friends in the first paragraph, but I’ll explain it as I understand it and perhaps that will be helpful. The verse: καὶ νῦν δόξασόν με σύ, ...


1

Your analysis is correct, and the following grammar citation provides the grammatical explanation to answer your remaining questions. Please click to enlarge. Thus the "splitting" of the clause with attributives (inserted in the middle of the sentence) is normal in Greek. Such "splitting" would not be typical in English.


1

Your difficulties in translating Genesis 22:8 and 22:14 are a result of insisting on a certain English translation which may not consistently capture the meaning of the entire passage. The verb ראה usually means "see" or something closely related to seeing. According to Strong's Concordance, the only instance where the verb ראה means "provide" other than ...


1

Possibly a Distinction of Land vs. People Davïd's answer pointed out some useful cross references with מלך (MLK) in relation to the prepositions. An observation of those indicated to me the possibility the author is distinguishing with the prepositions a difference between land area controlled versus people ruled over (geographic versus personal). The ...


1

The first instance, being in the perfect tense, indicates a completed past action with present results. The second instance, being in the imperfect, indicates a progressive or continuous past action. If the author of Hebrews was writing a translation of the KJV, then he should have used the same tense, possibly the aorist, but that's not the situation. ...


1

Both English translations (proposed by the OP) appear appropriate. For example, according to the syntax graph from Wu, A., & Tan, R. (2010) in addition to the syntax graph from Lukaszewski, A. L., Dubis, M., & Blakley, T. (2011), "all Israel" (the sons of Abraham through blood relation) are not "from Israel" (the sons of Abraham through promise). ...


1

The tense of Deuteronomy 30:11-14 is open to debate but is usually taken as the narrative present, with some debating that it could or should be read as future oriented. However, it is drawing a long straw to say that anything written in the future tense is a prophecy, or that a reasonable person would expect it to be a prophecy. Imperative statements are ...


1

Aorist In non-indicative moods (like the imperative) the "tense" indicates aspect and not time. So the aorist here indicates either a puntiliar (instantaneous) or undefined (generic) kind of action. Passive The active voice is used in Greek when the subject is performing the action (e.g. "he is eating"), while the passive is used to indicate an action ...


1

Excellent question, Susan. There are different perspectives on this. Some take it that John's own thinking about the epistle changed at this point in his writing, and he began to think of it as a work that would be completed (e.g. Longacre). Others take it that the first set of statements is in regard to what he is presently writing, while the second set is ...


1

The two verses are parallel and complementary. That is, the context points to delivery from the kingdom of darkness, and in this respect one "sees" the Kingdom of God. In this regard, the Apostle Paul cited the words of Jesus, when he (Paul) was before King Agrippa: Acts 26:15-18 (NASB) 15 And I said, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And the Lord said, ‘I am Jesus ...


1

The Idea in Brief The Masoretic Text does not indicate here the appearance of the consecutive waw with the Hebrew verb יָשַׁב (to dwell) but instead the consecutive waw with the Hebrew verb שׁוּב (to return). This conclusion comes from the marginalia of the Masoretic Text, which is the Massorah Parva. Discussion The Masoretic Text of the verse appears as ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible